Replies: 8
| visibility 1,171
|
Standout [340]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 544
Joined: 8/14/01
|
Don't Blame Clemson (for the ACC's lack of success)
Aug 22, 2013, 10:14 PM
|
|
Everyone loves to praise the SEC while simultaneously pick on the ACC, and to be honest, most of the praise towards the better SEC teams is justified; however, what's not warranted is automatically dismissing Clemson just because we're in the ACC. In fact, the numbers bear a different result.
Here's a read on why you can't blame Clemson for the ACC's woes, and why half of the SEC should be thanking their lucky stars just to be in the SEC.
http://www.thetigerswag.com/2013/08/dont-blame-clemson-or-fsu.html
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3572]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2978
Joined: 6/24/11
|
yep
Aug 22, 2013, 10:39 PM
|
|
I broke this stuff down awhile back. Clemson has actually got a respectable record against the sec over the last 13 years. With wins against highly ranked sec teams at that. And Clemson was the only team to almost beat auburn when auburn ran the table.(@auburn and with one of the worst teams in recent past at Clemson)
To boot the sec has more bottom feeders than ppl want to admit to. The they play in the sec excuse is crap look at Kentucky, vandy, ark, ole miss, Mississippi St, ten, scar bowl records. Clemson can beat at least 6 of those teams this year easily. Now throw in 3 cup cake ooc games and one other div 1 school from a bigger conference. Boom you have a "tough sec schedule" with Clemson easily going at least 9-2 at the min.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4067]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4552
Joined: 3/6/01
|
errr, not quite.
Aug 22, 2013, 10:48 PM
|
|
clemson was definitely not the only team to almost beat awbuhn that year..just off the top of my head, the coots also woulda/coulda/shoulda and Alabama had 'em down 27-0, before losing late 28-27..there are prob'ly more..and i'm not so sure about the "respectable record" part..my guess is we've got a losing record against the sec..and lastly, schedules are 12 games, so if you're 9-2, you've got another one to play.
other than that, i agree completely!
|
|
|
|
|
Amateur [30]
TigerPulse: 43%
Posts: 56
Joined: 8/1/13
|
Re: Don't Blame Clemson (for the ACC's lack of success)
Aug 22, 2013, 10:56 PM
|
|
OK. Try for honesty. Gamecocks' "easy" conf. schedule is Vandy, Ken, Tenn, Ark. Clemson's is Wake, Duke, Md and State. Which would you prefer? Stats can prove most anything. Reverse weight the history (last year counts 10 times as much as 10 years ago)as you should to predict future slope of the trend and your "analysis" does a tail spin. FSU, Clem and GT are 2 and 7 the last 3 years.
Yes I am a coot so don't waste time telling me.
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Don't Blame Clemson (for the ACC's lack of success)
Aug 22, 2013, 10:59 PM
|
|
Coot!
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [340]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 544
Joined: 8/14/01
|
Re: Don't Blame Clemson (for the ACC's lack of success)
Aug 22, 2013, 11:31 PM
[ in reply to Re: Don't Blame Clemson (for the ACC's lack of success) ] |
|
Okay - I'll bite...
In the last 3 years, your SEC doormats are a combined 31-65, while your ACC versions are 35-61 - both suck...
And while Clem, FSU, & GT are 2-7 vs their rivals, you're forgetting FSU's win over you guys, 2 Clem wins over Aub, and a Clem win over LSU (and one Clem loss to Aub). That's 6-8, or equivalent to your career in the SEC.
I'm not so sure what you're after...
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [340]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 544
Joined: 8/14/01
|
Re: Don't Blame Clemson (for the ACC's lack of success)
Aug 22, 2013, 11:41 PM
[ in reply to Re: Don't Blame Clemson (for the ACC's lack of success) ] |
|
Also, in the last three years, Clemson is 3-4, Florida State 3-1, and Georgia Tech 0-3, which only further backs up the purpose of the original post: While the ACC may not have much success against the SEC, don't blame Clemson or Florida State.
Coot!
|
|
|
|
|
Amateur [32]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 82
Joined: 6/22/12
|
Blame? No
Aug 23, 2013, 1:41 AM
|
|
But it's a shame no ACC team deserves accolades in that department.
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [340]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 544
Joined: 8/14/01
|
Re: Blame? No
Aug 23, 2013, 8:12 AM
|
|
Giving no one any accolades may be a bit harsh, but we are somewhat lumped in with our colleagues. For better or worse...
|
|
|
|
Replies: 8
| visibility 1,171
|
|
|